Saturday, October 06, 2012

IF YOU THINK THE WEEK'S BEEN BAD FOR CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O AFTER HE TANKED THE DEBATE, YOU OUGHT TO CHECK THE WELL BEING OF A PRESS CORPS MADE UP OF SO MANY WHO ARE EVEN MORE VESTED IN BARRRY O'S VICTORY.

Starting
in the US with veterans news. Senator Patty Murray is the Chair of the
Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. Her office notes:

(Washington,
D.C.) – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Chairman of the Senate
Veterans' Affairs Committee, joined with Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), Chairman of the CommitteeonArmed Services,
in sending a letter to the VA and DoD Deputy Secretaries requesting
that the Departments work more closely together, as true partners and
with greater involvement from senior leaders, to improve the IDES
process. The letter also calls on the Departments to set a definitive
timeline for completing the review in order to implement meaningful
changes. The requests stem from issues identified during GAO's
recently completed investigation into IDES.

"I
am not convinced the Departments have implemented a disability
evaluation process that is truly transparent, consistent, or
expeditious. Getting this right is a big challenge – but it's one that
we must overcome," said Senator Murray. "I've seen the impacts of a
broken system – whether it's from a wrong diagnosis, an improper
decision, or never-ending wait times. When the system doesn't work
accurately and quickly, or when servicemembers can't get a proper mental
health evaluation or diagnosis, it means they are not getting the care
they need and they are not moving on to civilian life. While DoD and VA
are at a critical juncture, I am confident that by working as true
partners and committing to real, meaningful changes, the Departments can
improve the system for the thousands of men and women who will be
transitioning in the next couple of years."

"I
am convinced that the DoD/VA Integrated Disability Evaluation System
can be improved to better address the needs of our wounded, ill, and
injured service members," said Senator Levin. "This system is too
complex, takes far too long, and still has an adversarial aspect that
our service members should not have to endure. It will take a concerted
effort by the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans
Affairs, working together, to bring about needed improvements."

The full text of the letters follows:

October 4, 2012

The Honorable Ashton B. Carter

Deputy Secretary of Defense

1010 Defense Pentagon, 3E944

Washington, DC 20301

The Honorable W. Scott Gould

Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs

810 Vermont Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20420

Dear Secretary Carter and Secretary Gould:

Essential
to the effort of improving the transition process for separating
servicemembers is overcoming the challenges confronting the Integrated
Disability Evaluation System (IDES). Earlier this year, as part of our
Committees' ongoing oversight of IDES, the Veterans' Affairs Committee
held a hearing examining the multiple challenges servicemembers still
face while navigating this joint program. As was made very clear at that
hearing, real improvements could only happen with the "total
engagement, cooperation and support of all senior leaders at both
Departments …"

Indeed,
the ongoing dialogue and Secretary Carter's July 2, 2012, letter to
Chairman Murray underscored this very point, affirming the Department of
Defense's commitment "to work closely with the Department of Veterans
Affairs to examine ways to improve timeliness and effectiveness of the
system …" Yet despite the importance of this work, and the Departments'
repeated assurances of promising results and progress made, reality has
yet to match rhetoric.

It
is because of this clear and urgent need for total engagement,
cooperation, and true partnership between the Departments that we write
to you regarding the recently released GAO report, Military Disability
System, Improved Monitoring Needed to Better Track and Manage
Performance. Discussing how to overcome the challenges facing the
system, GAO recommended that VA and DoD "work together to develop
timeframes for completing the IDES business process review and
implementing any resulting recommendations."

A
timely business process review has the potential to help the
Departments analyze each phase of the disability evaluation review
process and identify areas where greater coordination and integration
between the Departments is appropriate. Such a review can only be
successful if the Departments undertake it in a truly collaborative way,
evaluating their respective business processes in the context of what
is necessary for an integrated system. Further, any such effort must
have clear goals and timelines. So while both Departments concurred with
the GAO recommendation, the response from the Department of Veterans
Affairs was particularly troubling:

Although
the Department of Defense (DoD) has been leading the business process
review efforts described in this report, the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) has provided input and support to promote these efforts and
will continue to do so to the extent possible. At this time, the full
scope or current status of these efforts has not been disclosed to VA.
As such, VA recommends that developing timeframes for completion of
these efforts should be deferred to DoD.

This
response makes clear that true collaboration between the Departments on
the business process review has yet to occur. Surely, then, the answer
cannot be to drive the Departments further apart by deferring all
planning to the Department of Defense. Therefore, we are writing to
request from you not only a timeline for completion of the review and
implementation of any recommendations, but also that you make this
review a truly joint, collaborative effort to improve a broken system.
We also ask that you detail the steps you will take to personally ensure
the Departments work together as partners in reforming this system and
in addressing other joint challenges. As the Deputy Secretaries of your
Departments, your leadership is critical in order to create meaningful
change for our servicemembers and veterans.

We
remain committed to working with you to address the challenges
confronting this system, but further delay and a lack of meaningful
cooperation is unacceptable and risks jeopardizing the Departments'
ability to achieve a truly integrated disability evaluation system that
works. Thank you for your attention to this letter and for all that you
do on behalf of our servicemembers and veterans.

Still on violence, AP notes
that the Islamic State of Iraq has posted a message claiming credit for
the attack on the Tikrit prison last week that left many dead and
injured and resulted in a large number of prison escapees who still
remain at large. From the September 27th snapshot:

The latest day's violence includes a prison attack BBC News reports assailants using bombs and guns attacked a Tikrit prison. AFP quotes
a police Lieutenant Colonel stating, "A suicide bomber targeted the
gate of the prison with a car bomb and gunment then assaulted the
prison, after which they killed guards" and a police Colonel stating,
"The prisoners killed one policeman and wounded (prison director)
Brigadier General Laith al-Sagmani, the gunmen took control of the
prison, and clashes are continuing." Kitabat states
two car bombs were used to blow up the entrance to the prison and gain
access and they also state 12 guards have been killed. Reports note the
riot is continuing. Alsumaria reports
four guards have died, 1 police officer and the injured include two
soldiers and the prison director al-Sagmani. There's confusion as to
whether a number of prisoners were able to escape in the early stages
after the bombing and during gunfire. Reuters goes with "dozens" escaping which is probably smarter than the hard number some are repeating. Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) reports
5 police officers killed and another two injured -- the numbers are
going to vary until tomorrow, this is ongoing -- and state over 200
prisoners escaped with 33 of them already having been recaptured. If you
skip the English language media, what's not confusing is why it
happened and why it was able to happen. Alsumaria reports that there are
approximately 900 inmates in the prison and that many have death
sentences. Alsumaria does even more than that. It notes the recent
prison violence throughout the country and ties it into the death
sentences.

Today All Iraq News notes another escapee has been arrested and estimates 102 escaped. July 22nd,
the Islamic State of Iraq released an audio recording announcing a new
campaign of violence entitled Breaking The Walls which would include
prison breaks and killing "judges and investigators and their guards." (They also threatened to attack America on US soil.) AP notes they also claimed responsiblity for Sunday's violence:

As the month of September winds down, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) notes Iraq witnesses its second deadliest day of the month (September 9th was the deadliest day). BBC (link is text and video) offers,
"Civilians were among those killed and injured in the attacks around
the capital, but the aim of the attackers seems to have been to kill as
many security personnel as possible, wherever they could reach them,
says the BBC's Rami Ruhayem in Baghdad." Jamal Hashim (Xinhua) counts 34 dead and 85 injured while explaining, "In
and near the Iraqi capital, eight car bomb explosions and gunfire
attacks killed up to 25 people and wounded 59 others, according to the
police reports." Kareem Raheem, Suadad al-Salhy and Sophie Hares (Reuters) adds, "Two
more policemen were killed when a car bomb went off in the town of
Balad Ruz, 90 km (55 miles) northeast of Baghdad, and bomb planted in a
parked car in al Qaeda stronghold Mosul killed a civilian."Most reports float al Qaeda in Iraq as the culprit. The Irish Examiner quotes
MP Hakim al-Zamili who sits on the Security and Defense Committee
stating, "Al-Qaida leaders have no intention of leaving this country
or letting Iraqis live in peace. Thus, we should expect more attacks in
the near future. The situation in Iraq is still unstable ... and
repetition of such attacks shows that our security forces are still
unqualified to deal with the terrorists." If the series of assaults were
part of the Islamic State of Iraq's Breaking The Walls campaign, they
will no doubt claim credit in the next few days. July 22nd,
the Islamic State of Iraq released an audio recording announcing a new
campaign of violence entitled Breaking The Walls which would include
prison breaks and killing "judges and investigators and their guards."
(They also threatened to attack America on US soil.) They are only one
group in Iraq resorting to violence. On the continued violence, Mohammed Tawfeeq offers
this framework, "The violence comes just days after dozens of prisoners
broke out of a jail in the northern Iraqi city of Tikrit. Among those
who got out Thursday were several al Qaeda members on death row,
according to authorities. The jailbreak occurred when armed men
detonated two car bombs at the gates of Tasfirat jail. The explosions
triggered clashes with security forces."

A
large number of the escapees were death row inmates. Last month saw
protests, sit-ins and eating strikes in Iraqi prisons as prisoners
demanded the passage of an amnesty law. Such a law would mean many
behind bars would be allowed to leave and return to their families.
Nouri al-Maliki's been promising it since 2008 but it's still not been
passed. His State of Law has remained the biggest opponent to the bill.

Driven by then Justice Minister Robert Badinter's commitment and his speech to the National Assembly the law dated October 9th, 1981
abolished the death penalty in France. This law reinforced France's
longstanding efforts to promote human dignity. French law prohibits the
removal of any person to a country where they risk the death penalty.

France
has signed all international commitments on abolishing the death
penalty. Since 2007, abolishing the death penalty has been enshrined in
the French Constitution.

Al Mada reports
today on the Ministry of Human Rights declaring this week that the time
isn't right to heed the pleas of various organizations and governments
and place a moratorium on the death penalty. Of course it's not the
right time yet, they've already announced they plan to execute 200 more
people this year.

AMYGOODMAN: As Democracy Now! expands the debate, we put that question, "how would you create more jobs," to the Green Party's Dr. Jill Stein.

DR. JILLSTEIN: Thank you, and thank you so much for expanding this debate tonight, as you so often do, Amy, here on Democracy Now!
So, first just want to acknowledge the crisis is not getting better. We
still very much still have a crisis in our economy. One out of two
Americans are in poverty or living at a low income and heading towards
poverty. About 25 million people are either jobless or working in jobs
that do not pay living wages. There are millions of people who've lost
their homes, approximately 8 million. There is no end in sight to the
foreclosure crisis. And we have an entire generation of students who are
effectively indentured servants, who are trapped in unforgiving loans
and do not have the jobs to pay them back with unemployment and
underemployment rate of about 50% among our young people.

So,
we very much need new solutions. What we hear, really, from both Barack
Obama and Mitt Romney are essentially a rehash of where we have been
not only for the past four years, but certainly for the eight years
before that. We're hearing more about deregulating business and Wall
Street, as if we didn't have enough problem from that already. We're
hearing more about more tax breaks for the wealthy, and we've seen tax
breaks continue over the past many decades across all sectors of the tax
code to where the wealthy are not paying their fair share now. We're
hearing more about energy, dirty energy.

So,
we are calling for a Green New Deal modeled after the New Deal that
actually got us out of the Great Depression. They created approximately 4
million jobs in as little as two months. So, there is a lot that we can
do if we put our mind to it. We're calling for jobs created at the
level of our communities that are nationally funded and which put
decisions in the hands of the community about which kinds of jobs they
need both in the green economy and meeting their social needs, that
would be focused and controlled locally, but funded at the national
level.

ROCKYANDERSON:
Well, President Obama would like us to ignore what is happening is past
four years. Granted, he came into a tough situation, but we have to
consider that during the last 43 months we have had more than 8%
unemployment. It is the only time in this nation's history that we have
had a president that has presided even over three years of over 8%
unemployment. The fact is, that those 43 months of over 8% unemployment
during President Obama's term is four months more than all of the months
of over 8% unemployment from 1948 until President Obama's inauguration.
He talks about recovery, all the new jobs. The fact is, that in the
downturn, 60% of the jobs lost were mid skill and mid paying jobs, and
only 20% of the new jobs during the so-called recovery are of that
category; the mid skill and mid paying jobs.

Most
of the jobs are low-paying jobs, these new jobs he brags about are in
retail sales and food preparation. So, there are things that have been
proven in our history to work. We could have put in place, and it needs
to be put in immediately, a WPA
Works Progress Administration kind of program where we are investing in
the future by building up our nation's rapidly deteriorating
infrastructure, putting people to work. In the WPA
project they 8.5 million people to work. We could be putting 20 million
to 25 million people to work and making that kind of investment in our
nation's future.

We
need to renegotiate the outrageous free trade agreements and make sure
they are fair trade so that we're not discriminating against those
employers who want to hire the United States workers and also we need to
get a handle on health care costs, because there are a tremendous
competitive disadvantages because of the cost of health care in this
country.

The
same questions received real answers when the invitation list became
more inclusive. Something to remember if you watch the rest of the
debates on the corporate-sponsored, corporate-owned debates on the
corporate networks and the semi-corporate PBS.

What most Americans saw last night was the debate between Barack and Mitt only. As Ava and I noted this morning,
Governor Romney mopped the floor with President Obama -- the latter
coming off petulant and bitchy. As if to prove our point, Barack began
making comments about Big Bird today that were, yes, petulant and
bitchy. TheLos Angeles Times takes a reading of reporters and journalists (and Tom Hayden) and we'll note this from it, "Doyle McManus: Bottom line: Romney won. The question now is whether Romney can turn one good night into four good weeks." CNN and ORC International's poll found 67% of those watching the debate said Mitt won. Cindy Sheehan (Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox) offers
this analysis, "Blue Tie went first and went on a long rant on how his
presidency has basically been a failure at this, but of course, blaiming
(with some verity) the Red Tie that went before him. However, give
Blue Tie another four years with failed policies and things will get
better this time, he swears on a stack of holy Federal Reserve Notes.
("I really mean it this time, Baby"). Then Red Tie talked a lot about
"middle income" people. Both Ties talked a lot about the "Middle
Class." Well, the term "Middle Class" is a ruling class diversion
from the fact that the USA has the widest (and growing wider) income
disparity in the so-called industrial world. That's an inconvenient
fact that the Scoundrels

First,
Obama's personality. In an earlier life, I spent a lot of time studying
the psychoanalytic literature on narcissism. It was all part of a study
of canonical American poetry, where I thought that the imperial
grandiosity of the American imaginary could be illuminated by examining
its underlying narcissism. But all that is by way of saying I'm not
using this term recklessly. I think there's a lot of the narcissist
about Obama. There's something chilly and empty about him. Unlike Bill
Clinton, he doesn't revel in human company. It makes him uncomfortable.
He wants the rich and powerful to love him, but doesn't care about the
masses (unless they're a remote but adoring crowd). Many people seem to
bore him. It shows.

That's
what it's all about, isn't it? Those lady voters, and by this, oh best
beloveds, he means the former Clintonistas who were royally screwed by
Obama last time, they're too genteel for all the aggressive behavior
that Mitt displayed last night? Oh, my, I think they might have the
vapors. They're delicate, fragile flowers and unfit for such
improprieties. It's not decent! We shall whip them into a frenzy of
condemnation. We shall use their more civilized nature to reign Romney
in. He won't be allowed to do that next time, nosiree.

Was
Jim Lehrer aware that the White House is in violation of the law --
violation of the law and practice that's been in place since 1941? Was
Lehrer aware that the White House has allowed the US military to fill
their orders with Chinese goods?

An issue that some may see as minor was brought up by US House Rep Michael Michaud. I don't see it as minor.

He
reminded everyone of how there was uproar in the summer over the fact
that the American athletes at the Olympics were wearing outfits that
Americans didn't make.

Did you know our army wears uniforms that are not 100% American made?

And that brings us back to yesterday's hearing and we'll pick up with Michaud.

US
House Rep Mike Michaud: When you talk about uniforms made in the USA, I
read an article -- I left you a copy, I know you haven't had a chance
to read it yet -- but I'm not the only person who's upset with what's
happening with our military today. I was reading an article in the Air Force Times [by Jeff Schogol] where it says "Master sgt. says no to Chinese-made boots."
He was issued a pair of Chinese-made boots. He made a stink about it.
He ultimately did get American made boots. He was sent to Afghanistan.
And over in Afghanistan, he was given a uniform -- the Army Operation
Enduring Freedom camouflage uniform -- he asked for a pair of required
boots, the tan boots. Well guess what? He was issued a pair of
Chinese-made boots once again. In the article, you will see where the
Master Sgt at the end, and I would like to quote it, what the Master Sgt
said. And I quote, "This is about patriotism. This is about the Berry
Amendment set forth over 60 years ago. This is about American soldiers
wearing our country's uniform made by Americans." And I couldn't agree
more with the Master Sgt. At a time when our nation is divided and the
discourse in Washington, DC is extremely negative, it seems to me that
with the outrage of our athletes wearing Chinese-made uniforms [at the
summer Olympics] that this is one issue that we can all agree on. Even
both candidates who are running for president of the United States are
criticizing one another about not being tough on China and both
campaigns are talking about making sure more things are stamped with
"Made in the USA." Well there's a way we can get tough on China,
increase things Made in the USA and to make sure that our American
soldiers are not treated as second class citizens, that they have the
best. That's what they're fighting for, this country, United States of
America. And I find it extremely concerning because this issue is not an
issue that needs Congress to act. It's not an issue that we need a
regulatory agency to address. It's an issue that's already the law. So
my question to you is: What is the American Legion's position? Do you
believe that our soldiers who are putting their lives on the line each
and every day for us, should they be wearing clothing made in the United
States of America?

James
Koutz: The answer is yes. The American Legion believes that [stops for
applause to die down]. I'm sure the American Legion and the American
people believe that all equipment should be made in the United States of
America. And there you go again, talking about jobs. Put the Americans
to work making boots. That'll provide jobs here at home.

US
House Rep Mike Michaud: Well I want to thank you very much, National
Commander, and just for the record, I know Congressman Duncan Hunter who
is a Republican colleague from California, he and I are writing a
letter, we encourage our colleagues to sign that letter, to the
administration, requiring them to comply with the intent of the law and
it's unfortunate that we have to do that. And hopefully, we'll see some
changes in that regard.

When the
discussion is jobs and when you're speaking to the Commander-in-Chief
of the military and when the military is in violation of the Berry
Amendment and Congress is calling that out, you probably need to bring
that up in the debate. Anna Mulrine (Christian Science Monitor) reports on how veterans and veterans groups feel they were ignored in the debate last night.

After
President Barack Obama stumbled his way to a loss in the first
presidential debate on Wednesday night, Democratic National Committee
communications director Brad Woodhouse took to MSNBC to try to spin
criticism back in the direction of Mitt Romney with what appeared to be a
fabricated claim.

"He wants to go back to war in Iraq," Woodhouse said of Romney during a Thursday morning appearance on MSNBC.

The Daily Caller
remains a right-wing organ and not a news outlet. It does that, in
part, because it's to busy churning out quick 'posts' to do journalism.

If
I were a reporter covering a false charge that a candidate supposedly
wanted the US military to go back into Iraq, I think it would be
incumbent upon me to mention that the one making the charge (that would
be Barack's campaign) is actually representing the candidate who is
trying to get more US military back into Iraq.

Dar Addustour reports
on the US military that remains in Iraq -- with a headline of how the
Pentagon refuses to withdraw them -- noting that they did not leave
during the supposed full withdrawal of US forces in December 2011 and
that they have instead been working with implementing security and
assistng counter-terrorism forces. The article notes that despite a
lack of Congressional funding for October, the Pentagon has juggled
monies to find enough funds to cover the costs through January 1st. Wael Grace (Al Mada) reports
that the US Embassy inside the Green Zone is cloaked in mystery and
that no one can tell you the number of employees -- civilian or
military. Grace points out that despite the lowering of the US flag
over Baghdad in 2011 and the announcement that, after 9 years, military
operations were ending, the US government, in fact, kept US troops in
Iraq after the supposed withdrawl of December 2011. An Iraqi MP on the
Security and Defense Committee tells Grace that they are sure there is a
much larger number os US troops in the Embassy and that the Iraqi
government does not know how many US forces remain in Iraq. An MP with
Sadr's bloc says that the US military is there for logistic support but
also states that the Iraqi government has no idea of the actual number
of US troops on the ground in Iraq. The article ends reminding that
all US forces were supposed to leave Iraq at the end of 2011 . . . but
didn't. Last week, Tim Arango (New York Times) reported,
"Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could
result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on
training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to
General Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently
deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with
intelligence."

I have no idea why The Daily Caller missed that obvious point. As we wrap up the debate section and move into the Iraq section, a big thank you to Ann who helped track down debate commentaries worth including in this snapshot.

Thursday, October 04, 2012

LAST NIGHT, CELEBRITY IN CHIEF THE VERY SHY
BARRY O WAS FORCED TO GO OUT ON THE SCARY STAGE AND CONFRONT THE
MASSIVELY POPULAR MITT ROMNEY WHO IS KNOWN TO BE ONE OF THE BEST
SPEAKERS OF THIS DECADE AND . . .

WRONG!

LAST
NIGHT, PAMPERED AND PRAISED BARRY O WENT UP AGAINST THE CANDIDATE THE
BULK OF THE PRESS CORPS HAS INSISTED WAS A JOKE AND WHO HAD ALREADY LOST
THE RACE.

AND A FUNNY THING HAPPENED.

WHEN THE PUBLIC WAS ABLE TO WATCH THE TWO WITHOUT THE SNARK OF GAIL COLLINS AND OTHERS, WHAT THEY WERE LEFT WITH WAS A ROMNEY WHO COULD COMMUNICATE AND A SNIPPY LITTLE BARRY O WHO FELT HE SHOULD BE HAILED AS THE WINNER JUST BECAUSE HE BOTHERED TO SHOW UP.

USA Today's Susan Page (link is text and video) has a column today on the presidential debates which kick off tonight for some candidates. (Some? As Isaiah notes his comic this morning, Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein and Libertarian Party presidential candidate Gary Johnson will not be on stage, the duopoly does not want them invited.) In
her piece, Pages notes a number of topics she feels should be covered
including, "President Obama can rightly claim to be an early opponent to
the war in Iraq. But once troops were there, he was an opponent of the
surge that ultimately proved successful. What has he learned from those
two decisions that will make him a more effective commander in chief in
the future?" Before anyone points out that tonight's debate is domestic
topics, Susan Page knows that, her column is about the three debates
President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney will take part in.

There
are many good questions Barack could be asked about Iraq including why
he backed Nouri al-Maliki for a second term as prime minister after
Nouri's State of Law came in second? The country's Constitution was
very clear on the process and how do you help a fledging democracy take
root when you overturn the results of an election? As John Barry's "'The Engame' Is A Well Researched, Highly Critical Look at U.S. Policy in Iraq" (TheDaily Beast) notes:

As Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor charge in their ambitious new history of the Iraq war, The Endgame,
Obama's administration sacrificed political influence by failing in
2010 to insist that the results of Iraq's first proper election be
honored: "When the Obama administration acquiesced in the questionable
judicial opinion that prevented Ayad Allawi's bloc, after it had won the
most seats in 2010, from the first attempt at forming a new government,
it undermined the prospects, however slim, for a compromise that might
have led to a genuinely inclusive and cross-sectarian government."

Another
question Barack should be asked is why he keeps talking about bringing
the troops home from Iraq when (a) 15,000 troops were moved to Kuwait,
(b) a small number of US troops were left in Iraq, (c) Barack just sent a
small number of Special-Ops back into Iraq and (d) he's negotiating to
send more US troops back into Iraq?

Last week, Tim Arango (New York Times) reported,
"Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could
result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on
training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to
General Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently
deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with
intelligence." As John Glaser (Antiwar.com) observes,
"Most Americans have been led to believe that all US forces besides
those guarding the massive American Embassy in Iraq have been withdrawn
since the end of last year. But small units have remained in Baghdad
to support elite Iraqi forces that report directly to the increasingly
authoritarian Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki." RTT News reports
today, "U.S. military training for Iraqi security forces will continue
uninterrupted despite failure of the Congress to approve money for it in
a temporary spending bill now funding government operations, the
Pentagon has said." northsunm32 (All Voices) points out,
"Pentagon officials had warned legislators that the failure to extend
the authorization for the program could force the withdrawal of 220 of
296 personnel it currently had in Iraq working with the Iraqis.
Obviously, this did not sway Congress. However, just as obviously,
there is no plan to withdraw those personnel."

We'll
come back to the topic of the US presidential elections at the end of
the snapshot. Right now, we'll stay with the US but move to veterans
issues. Last week, James Dao (New York Times) reported,
"Numbers tell the story. Last year, veterans filed more than 1.3
million claims, double the number in 2001. Despite having added nearly
4,000 new workers since 2008, the agnecy did not keep pace, completing
less than 80 percent of its inventory. This year, the agency has
already completed more than 1 million claims for the third consecutive
year. Yet it is still taking about eight months to process the average
claim, two months longer than a decade ago. As of Monday, 890 pensions
and compensation claims were pending." That was last week. Today?

James
Koutz: We've seen many pilot programs and promises from VA. It's time
to roll up our sleeves and really fix what's wrong with this system. As
the Social Security Administration and other benefit programs can handle
their claims in a timely manner, veterans cannot understand why the VA
cannot. In the American Legion, we've made training our Service Officers
a top priority. It's part of the job -- not something that gets in the
way of the job. We bring our Service Officers together for training
twice a year. They make recommendations based on a complex system they
must navigate on a daily basis. They're the ones who can see the flaws
in the VA's work-credit system that rewards quantity over quality. There
simply has to be a better way to get this done. For instance, VA could
start counting claims done right as a positive and claims done wrong as a
negative so everyone could have a more accurate picture of what's
reallly getting done in these regional offices. Veterans waiting past
the realistic target date might be compensated with interest on their
claims creating an incentive for VA also to get these claims decided on
time. There are ways to work with the mechanics of this system and to
make it serve the veteran and not the bureaucrats. We're willing to roll
up our sleeves and work with you to find those ways.The
American Legion has people in the trenches who not only understand the
problems but contribute to the solutions. Veterans are tired of hearing
how the government is working on ending a backlog that continues to
grow. Veterans and the American Legion want results and are willing to
do whatever it takes to obtain them. Remember, we're all partners in
this. Everyone knows the claims process is confusing for veterans and
the American Legion
is there with free services to help navigate the system and make things
easier for both the veteran and the VA personnel who have decided their
claims. Nobody gets charged a penny for this service -- not the
veteran, not the government.

[. . .]

Chair
Jeff Miller: I want to hone in, just for a bit, on the claims backlog
because obviously that is a huge issue that's out there, that everybody
in this room is concerned about. Congress is concerned about it. The
Dept of Veterans Affairs is concerned about it. But it doesn't seem to
be getting any better. [VA] Secretary [Eric] Shinseki has already said
several times, you quoted it in your opening statement, that by 2015,
they would, within 125 days, the idea was that everybody would have
their claims ajudicated at 100%. Well it isn't happening. And
unfortunately, we had a hearing just a couple of weeks ago where we kind
of took a status check with VA: Where are you? Their focus was more on
what they were turning out which is exactly what you talked about. And
that's important. A million claims being adjudicated. But the backlog is
growing. And if you're not keeping up with that backlog, it's certainly
not going to assist and fix the problem. So, again, I would like to
hear from you if you would, your perspective on what are the things that
can be done? What can Congress do legislatively, if you will, to assist
the problem? We all talk about the electronic medical record. But that
is years away from being able to truly have that seamless transition.
We're moving in that direction. But we've got folks, you know, today
that are waiting one, two years waiting to have their claims ajudicated
and we've put dollars forward, we've put bodies forward. It does not
seem to fix the issue. So I'd like to hear what you think.

James
Koutz: Well, Mr. Chairman, I think one of the things that we could do
is do more hiring of ajudicators, do more hiring of the processers. As
you probably know, a lot of these claims that are coming back, they're
not completed. They need to be fully developed claims. I believe like
any other business, if you're in the backlog, then the only way to get
the backlog taken care of is to hire more people. And I understand the
VA -- being a former, or still a commissioner of the Indiana Department
of Veterans Affairs -- that it takes time to train an ajudicator or
claims processer. That'll take time. But maybe we can -- and I don't
know how much overtime they're working, if they're working overtime --
But I think they've got to do these claims more accurately because, when
they come back, the first thing that we see is mistakes and that claim
goes right back to the regional office and we're starting all over
again from step one. So I think that's the biggest thing, maybe get the
accuracy where the Secretary said he would like to have it, 98%
accuracy. If we get to that number, then I think you'll see the
backlogs claim be reduced.

Chair
Jeff Miller: Do you know the percentage of the claims that your Service
Officers put together or ajudicated complete? I mean, they may not
necessarily get the rating that they're asking for, but the percentage
of packages that are completed?

James Koutz: I don't. But Peter Gaytan, our executive director of our Washington office, probably can answer that for you.

Peter
Gaytan: Thank you, Commander. Mr. Chairman, the American Legion takes
very seriously, the quality of our work and our training of our Service
Officres. Twice a year, we put our Service Officers rigorous training
to make sure that they have the qualifications, knowledge and skills to
not only produce quality, fully developed claims that we submit to the
VA but also to help reduce the backlog because it's got to be a team
effort to do that. We're going to have qualified, well trained officers
to do this work. Now your specific question on the number that the
American Legion ajudicates or

Chair Jeff Miller: Or percentage.

Peter
Gaytan: I would like to defer to our National Veterans Affairs and
Rehabilitation Commission VA Director Verna Jones who handles that area.

Verna
Jones: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We actually received a report from the
VA just last week. And I can tell you the number of claims. The
American Legion handles 244,000 claims annually. That's our number
this year: 244,000. Now I'm not sure of the exact percentage but the
number is 244,000 claimsfor the American Legion nationally.

Chair
Jeff Miller: Okay. If you would, just for the record, if you could let
us know, just trying to get a handle, you know, on how many claims are
being done by the veteran themselves obviously using the veterans
Service Officer. The assumption, from my standpoint, would be that it
would be better to go through a Service Officer in order to file your
claim. But I'm interested in knowing for no other reason then I think
folks up here on the dais would like to hear it.

Today
the US House Veterans Affairs Committee and Senate Veterans Affairs
Committee held a joint-hearing which was a presentation by the American
Legion. The American Legion's
National Commander James Koutz handled the presentation and he was
accomanied by Verna Jones, Michael Helm, Peter Gaytan and Kenneth
Governor. The Chair of the House Committee is Jeff Miller who was
present. As he noted, "the Congressional schedule changed a few weeks
ago so a lot of members are not in Washington today." Ranking Member
Bob Filner is not seeking re-election to the Congress but is instead running for Mayor of San Diego. The scheduling change meant that he was not present. US House Rep Mike Michaud was Acting Ranking Member.

Acting
Ranking Member Mike Michaud: I was troubled by the July report from
CBS News that found suicide rates for our soldiers is up 80%. Our
veterans are returning from war with invisible wounds that need
treatment but are discouraged from seeking treatment for various
reasons. As a nation, we can do better. We must get this right.

He was referring to David Martin's report for CBS Evening News (link is text and video) report
on the suicide rate in July: "July was the worst month ever for Army
suicides. Thirty-eight active duty and reserve soldiers took their own
lives. Among active duty troops, 2012 could turn out to be the worst
year ever. Behind the numbers are heartbroken widows who say their
husbands sought help but couldn't get it." And as disturbing is the
number of veterans suicides.

Over the weekend and through Monday, the Austin American-Stateman
began publishing the results of their investigative series on veterans
deaths. This was a six-month investigation focusing on the the deaths
of Texas veterans and, in their overview article, they noted:

■ More than one in three died from a drug overdose, a fatal combination of drugs, or suicide. Their median age at death was 28.

■ Nearly one in five died in a motor vehicle crash.

■
Among those with a primary diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder,
the numbers are even more disturbing: 80 percent died of overdose,
suicide or a single vehicle crash. Only two of the 46 Texas veterans of
the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts with a PTSD diagnosis died of natural
causes, according to the analysis.

■
The 345 Texas veterans identified by the VA as having died since coming
home is equal to nearly two-thirds of the state's casualties in Iraq
and Afghanistan. But that only includes veterans who have sought VA
benefits, meaning the total number of deaths is likely much larger.

That is from the overview article. The paper also offered "Suicide among veterans receiving less attention than active-duty deaths"
which tells the story of Iraq War veteran Ray Rivas who took his own
life on a day when his wife, Colleen Rivas, described him being in "good
spirits" and notes:An American-Statesman
investigation into the deaths of 266 Texans who served during the Iraq
or Afghanistan wars show that 45 committed suicide, making it the
fourth-leading cause of death behind illness, accidents and
drug-related deaths. That percentage is more than four times higher than
the general population: Suicide accounted for 3.6 percent of all Texas
deaths over the same period, compared with 16.9 percent of the
veterans the newspaper studied.

Rivas o.d.ed "on sleeping
pills in a parking lot." Iraq War veteran Eric Sessions died on his
motorcycle and is part of the report entitled "After returning home, many veterans get into motor vehicle accidents"
which finds, "Next to illness and disease, motor vehicle accidents
such as Sessions' were the leading cause of death among the 266 Texas
veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan whose histories were tracked by the
American-Statesman. The motorcycle and car wrecks were responsible for
50 deaths, or 18.8 percent of the total ― more than suicides or
prescription drug overdoses." The paper also offers "Which veterans are at highest risk for suicide?"
The Military Suicide Research Consortium's Peter Gutierrez agrees that
"relationship problems, legal problems, mental illness, depression" are
the same in the civilian world and among service members and veterans
but feels the civilian population is less likely to suffer from
Post-Traumatic Stress and Traumatic Brain Injury. Afghanistan War
veteran KC Dobson's took her own life last year, "Her Army photos show a
beaming, freckle-faced young woman in fatigues, her dark hair pulled
back in a bun. But her smile masked what family members said was
emotional and physical pain that dogged her throughout her deployment
to Iraq and after her 2010 discharge."

Yesterday, Josh Rogin (Foreign Policy) broke the following news,
"In its final act before leaving town earlier this month, Congress
passed a continuing resolution (CR) that failed to reauthorize the main
mission of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq (OSC-I), despite
Pentagon warnings that the move could force the military to withdraw
hundreds of U.S. troops who are still in Baghdad helping to develop the
Iraqi security forces and working with them on counterterrorism. The
authority for U.S. forces to train and assist the Iraqi security forces
expired Sunday." Never fear. When it comes to destruction, it will
always be paid for. Lolita C. Baldor (AP) reports
that the Defense Dept has announced it has the money to cover the costs
"in its temporary budget." Of course, it does. Of course. Kristina Wong (Washington Times) adds
that George Little, Pentagon spokesperson, declared the move was "a
temporary bridge while we seek a longer-term way ahead for [the Office
of Security Cooperation-Iraq] in the fiscal year 2013 National Defense
Authorization Act, which we expect to be taken up by Congress later this
year."

Some day the broadcast media will
cover what's going on. It may be a 100 years from now, but some day
they will. In the meantime, we're supposed to pretend it's not taking
place.

Mike
Prysner: The whole strategy behind the US' so-called withdrawal of US
forces from Iraq was the ability to leave in its place forces that would
maintain and protect the interests of the US government, namely US
control over Iraq's resources and the dividing up of Iraq's oil among
various major British and US oil companies, and French and German as
well. The Iraqi government exists today, and the Iraqi forces exist
today to maintain the status quo, to maintain the new government that
the United States felt worthy of sending to leadership. The security
in Washington means that the interests are secured, that US bases are
secured, that US contracts are secured. And if anything threatens that,
they want the Iraqi government to crush it with violence, to torture
people, to attack demonstrations and so forth. We should remember
that if the Iraqi security forces are not to the task that the US has
assigned for them -- we have to keep in mind that President Obama
himself said when he was giving the speech celebrating the end of the
Iraq war, he said very plainly that our commitment to Iraq has not
ended.

At Foreign Policy, Peter Feaver argues it's time to examine Iraq in terms of Barack. Apparently, Feaver wasn't bowled over by the foreign policy 'analysis' The NewsHour provided last week (as Ava and I pointed out,
PBS stacked the deck by inviting a reporter and an 'independent'
analyst who Tweeted insults about Mitt Romney before his appearance on The NewsHour).
I can agree with him on the issue of examining Barack's actions with
regards to Iraq. I don't agree with Feaver that Fred and Kimberly Kagan
should be listened to on Iraq because they've "earned the right to a
respectful hearing on" the topic. But I will agree that they should
be listened to since they are the immediate in-laws of State Dept's
spokesperson Victoria Nuland.

It's always
comical to watch the Cult of St. Barack huff and puff about the neocons
and grasp how ignorant the Cult is and how unaware they are of just how
many neocons populate Barack's administration. Victoria Nuland, married
to Robert Kagan) is one such neocon and she was Dick Cheney's right
hand during the planning of the Iraq War. Didn't stop the
administration from giving her a job -- a high profile one in fact. So
if she speaks for the State Dept, and she does, Peter Feaver, there's
the reason to listen to his sister-in-law Kimberly and brother-in-law
Fred Kagan. And for those who think she was working with the State Dept
when she helped Cheney, no. Just because the State Dept has vanished
her Bully Boy Bush days doesn't mean we have done the same. From November 24, 2004:

Kagan's
wife works as Cheney's deputy national security adviser. That's Ms.
Nuland' s title. So in effect, Ms. Nuland's employed by "team B" --
she's apparently not working on team B's campaign, but she works for
team B. Potentially, Kagan has a vested interest in the outcome of the
2004 election.

As you may remember,
back then it was NPR covering for Nuland, erasing her from the scene
while letting Robert Kagan go on the air to explain what was wrong with
then presidential contender John Kerry -- explain what was wrong from an
'independent' stand point because NPR didn't think the listeners had a
right to know the man ripping apart Kerry and praising Bush wasn't so
independent, that his wife was Dick Cheney's Deputy National Security
Adviser.

Dick Cheney. The name that still
sends shudders down the spines of many Democrats. But Barack let her
and a lot of other neocons into the administration.

Iraq needs to be evaluated. Don't express the press to rush to do that because evaluating requires facts and it's Iraq's Dar Addustour, and not NPR, that reported today on the New York Times article
mentioning that the US just sent a unit of Speical-Ops back into Iraq
and how there are negotiations between the White House and Iraq to
returns US troops to Iraq in larger number. Dar Addustour is referring to Tim Arango's report
from last week, "Iraq and the United States are negotiating an
agreement that could result in the return of small units of American
soldiers to Iraq on training missions. At the request of the Iraqi
government, according to General Caslen, a unit of Army Special
Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on
counterterrorism and help with intelligence."

Meanwhile AFP reports
that Nouri's Baghdad-based government is calling for an end to the
treaty between Iraq and Turkey that currently allows Turkish war planes
to bomb northern Iraq (Turkey bombs what they say are suspected PKK
camps). Ali al-Dabbagh, Nouri's spokesperson, is quoted stating, "The
cabinet decided to reject the presence of any foreign bases or forces on
Iraqi land and to reject the entry of any foreign military forces into
Iraqi land." Ahlul Bayt News Agency continues
that al-Dabbagh declared that the government recommends Parliament
cancel any existing contract and refuse to extend any agreements. The Tehran Times adds,
"According to the Turkish parliament, the military is authorized to
conduct operations inside Iraq's airspace under the pretext of targeting
hideouts of Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) militants. These operations
have intensified after the withdrawal of the United States from Iraq,
which is not yet capable of securing its airspace." AFP notes,
"A high-ranking Iraqi official said the decision was aimed at Turkish
military bases in the north Iraq province of Dohuk, one of the three
provinces that make up the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG)" and
that, "Ties between Iraq and Turkey have been marred by a flurry of
disputes, including Ankara's refusal to extradite Iraqi Vice President
Tareq al-Hashemi, who has been sentenced to death in absentia by an
Iraqi court." Reuters reminds that, "The Baghdad government's power over Iraq's autonomous Kurdistan region is limited." The announcement came as Al Jazeera reported,
"Turkish security forces have killed 12 Kurdish rebels in fighting,
including two women who attempted to infiltrate from neighbouring Iraq,
local security sources said."

Just yesterday, September was hailed as the most violent month in Iraq in two years, while today violence continues as does fear and silence. On fear, Alsumaria reports that in Basara accusations are being tossed around following the assassination last Thursday
of former Governor (2005 to 2009) Mohammed Misbah Waili with some
accusing a clan within the province and the clan accusing unnamed
foreign powers. On the silence, Mohamad Ali Harissi (AFP) reports
that Sunday's violence (at least 33 dead, at least 106 injured,
according to AFP's count) was met with silence and that no sympathy was
expressed or violence noted on the websites of Prime Minister Nouri
al-Maliki, President Jalal Talabani or Speaker of Parliament Osama
al-Nujaifi, that -- like the three politicians -- state TV channel
Iraqiya focused on football and ignored the violence, that the bulk of
the papers ignored the violence and the official government paper
al-Sabah waited until page four to mention the violence and then under
the headline "Bagdad Operations [Command] announces foiling an attempted
terrorist plot with eight car bombs." Al Rafidyan carries the AFP report here. Today, Alsumaria reports
the corpses of 3 men wearing fire fighter uniforms were found in
Baghdad and that a Baquba roadside bombing left 2 people injured, an
armed attack in Kirkuk that left 1 street cleaner and two other people
injured, a Falluja roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer
and left another person injured, 2 corpses were discovered in Tirkt.
In addition, Alsumaria reports a Kirkuk armed attack which left 2 people dead.